Complexities, variations, and errors of numbering within clinical notes: the potential impact on information extraction and cohort-identification
dc.contributor.author | Hanauer, David A | |
dc.contributor.author | Mei, Qiaozhu | |
dc.contributor.author | Vydiswaran, V. G V | |
dc.contributor.author | Singh, Karandeep | |
dc.contributor.author | Landis-Lewis, Zach | |
dc.contributor.author | Weng, Chunhua | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2019-04-07T03:19:17Z | |
dc.date.available | 2019-04-07T03:19:17Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2019-04-04 | |
dc.identifier.citation | BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making. 2019 Apr 04;19(Suppl 3):75 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-019-0784-1 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/148519 | |
dc.description.abstract | Abstract Background Numbers and numerical concepts appear frequently in free text clinical notes from electronic health records. Knowledge of the frequent lexical variations of these numerical concepts, and their accurate identification, is important for many information extraction tasks. This paper describes an analysis of the variation in how numbers and numerical concepts are represented in clinical notes. Methods We used an inverted index of approximately 100 million notes to obtain the frequency of various permutations of numbers and numerical concepts, including the use of Roman numerals, numbers spelled as English words, and invalid dates, among others. Overall, twelve types of lexical variants were analyzed. Results We found substantial variation in how these concepts were represented in the notes, including multiple data quality issues. We also demonstrate that not considering these variations could have substantial real-world implications for cohort identification tasks, with one case missing > 80% of potential patients. Conclusions Numbering within clinical notes can be variable, and not taking these variations into account could result in missing or inaccurate information for natural language processing and information retrieval tasks. | |
dc.title | Complexities, variations, and errors of numbering within clinical notes: the potential impact on information extraction and cohort-identification | |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/148519/1/12911_2019_Article_784.pdf | |
dc.language.rfc3066 | en | |
dc.rights.holder | The Author(s). | |
dc.date.updated | 2019-04-07T03:19:18Z | |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.